Sam, the Irish were notoriously healthy while eating 87% of their calories from potatoes. This is a carb source that was introduced from America, not one that they "evolved" to eat. Also many studies have shown that, over time, low carb diets can lead to low T3.

@Lariaz: I lose more weight around 100g of carbs each day, but cannot control my glucose levels. It's a double-edged sword for people like me. If you have stalled out, up your intake and see how it goes.

You're claiming there's "no evidence" that eating "right" carbs is fine for healthy people, which is patently and demonstrably false. It's actually so ridiculous, I can't believe I'm even responding to this question in a serious manner.

I've been coming to the same conclusion lately! Is Mark Sisson's 50-100g based solely on keeping the dieter in ketosis, or is there something more? I eat too much protein to keep myself in ketosis, so I've been thinking that upping my carbs probably wouldn't have too big an effect on me, for better or worse.

@Wisper: That's not evidence that a Western European will have the same result. In any case, there are a multitude of differences besides diet between those societies and the one we live in, any one, or several, or all of which could affect their health.

completely untrue, and yet it seems to be repeated so often here, it's gospel. you can lose weight with any proportion of carbs in your diet. annoying that this crap persists (i'm looking at you, mark sisson).

7
Answers

Carbs are only a concern for those (like me) that are metabolically deranged. If you are healthy and can properly process carbs, there is no reason to avoid them. Some gain weight on carbs, others thrive. It must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

I understand the appeal of the idea that, as long as we consume the "right" carbohydrates (potatoes vs. wheat, for example) or that as long as we're not "metabolically deranged", we'll suffer no ill-effects, but the fact is that there is, as yet, no evidence for it.

There have only been a half-dozen or so dietary trials of a Paleo diet, and none of them were controlled for carbohydrate. No one has ever compared the effects of consuming the same amount of carbohydrate from different sources.

Saying "I consume lots of carbs and I'm lean and healthy, therefore carbs are okay." is like saying, "I smoked a cigarette yesterday and I didn't die, therefore cigarettes are harmless." No one says that overconsumption of carbs will make you obese and diabetic overnight. It's a process that might take decades. (The Paleo demographic skews young and fit. Being young and active will atone for a multitude of dietary sins, but only temporarily.)

Basically, here at PaleoHacks, dismissing the insulin theory is what the cool kids do. They might, at some future date, be proven correct, but that time has not yet arrived.

@Wisper: That's not evidence that a Western European will have the same result. In any case, there are a multitude of differences besides diet between those societies and the one we live in, any one, or several, or all of which could affect their health.

Sam, the Irish were notoriously healthy while eating 87% of their calories from potatoes. This is a carb source that was introduced from America, not one that they "evolved" to eat. Also many studies have shown that, over time, low carb diets can lead to low T3.

You're claiming there's "no evidence" that eating "right" carbs is fine for healthy people, which is patently and demonstrably false. It's actually so ridiculous, I can't believe I'm even responding to this question in a serious manner.

I also think people tend to confuse "carbs" with "grains." All grains contain carbs, but not all carbs are grains. (Kind of like the rectangle/square thing if you remember your elementary school geometry, hehheh.) Because of the many detrimental effects of certain kinds of grains, carbs are safer coming from tubers, root veggies, and some fruit. These foods don't have the same effects on psychological or even dermatological health as the gluten grains seem to, and calorie for calorie, most of the roots & tubers have more vitamins & minerals than grains, so at least you're getting something else pretty good along with the carbs.

For people with good insulin sensitivity and no major health issues stemming from blood glucose and insulin regulation, carbohydrates are not that big an issue, especially if they're physically active and/or have athletic performance goals.

For people with lots of weight to lose and other metabolic issues, carbs should be limited (not eliminated, but limited).

Carbohydrate bearing foods are not in and of themselves a concern for most people. Paleo can be done very-low carb, low carb, or moderate. Paleo tends not to be "high carbohydrate", however, though technically, it could (you won't find many people like that here).

completely untrue, and yet it seems to be repeated so often here, it's gospel. you can lose weight with any proportion of carbs in your diet. annoying that this crap persists (i'm looking at you, mark sisson).

I've been coming to the same conclusion lately! Is Mark Sisson's 50-100g based solely on keeping the dieter in ketosis, or is there something more? I eat too much protein to keep myself in ketosis, so I've been thinking that upping my carbs probably wouldn't have too big an effect on me, for better or worse.

@Lariaz: I lose more weight around 100g of carbs each day, but cannot control my glucose levels. It's a double-edged sword for people like me. If you have stalled out, up your intake and see how it goes.